SCI Questions and Suggestions - Make Them Here!

Dear Sir's
I would like to thank SCI for the great work you do for us as members.

I am writing from a African Outfitters perspective only, re Donated hunts.

I know this has been a contentious issue, but I feel us as Exhibitors largely feel the same.

First of all : I believe that there are too many donations accepted by SCI, main as well as Chapters alike.
Secondly: The donations are sold for next to no value at all, not helping the industry nor SCI.

I don't really have all the answers, but a few suggestions could be.
1. Only accept Quality donations, and limit them.
2. Have a minimum bid that equates to at least 60% of real value.

It costs us as Exhibitors a lot of money to come and exhibit at SCI, this is also a large platform for a lot of us to try get business, but we also now compete to sell our product with our landlord.
It is remarkable how the show floor "empties out" once the Auctions start. The floor is what we pay for and come to, to market ourselves.
SCI also now accepts on line bids, this does not encourage people to actually come to the Exhibit floor or convention.

We are in a partnership and need to work together, if the Exhibitors do not get the feet they need, SCI will not get the Quality Exhibitors in future, I know it does not seem like that at present due to the large demand for Booth space.

I would like to copy and paste a conversation I had with one of our old standing clients and then a SCI chapter president, below this thread.

I thank you for allowing me my 2 cents worth and really hope there can be a solution found for my/our dilemma. I also trust that I do not offend anyone with my views and that it is taken as constructive criticism.

Best regards Ernest.

(HI Ernest and Marita,
Hope you guys got home safe and sound. It was so great to see you both in Vegas and see how your kids are almost all grown up. Yes Ernest I am looking older but, just like a fine wine, we get better with age.
Well, here is were we stand for our 2019 safari. We went to a local SCI banquet in Madison last night and we bought two hunts at ridiculously low prices. I do not understand why they went so cheap but they did, like for a few hundred dollars, so we could not pass them up. Unfortunately that means we won't be seeing you guys in the near future.
We want to thank you so much for trying to put together a hunt the kids could afford. We'll try to put something together in the next few years to hunt with you guys again.
Have a awesome 2018 and may God Bless you both.
Thanks

I know Ernest - Let me say all the years I was President here in ......... I only wanted no more than 3 Safaris on live Auction from Africa , any more than that we ended up giving them away . Then the Chapter looks bad and the Donor is not happy.
Just got word over the weekend that there was 23 African Safaris on live auction up at the ............ chapter2 weeks ago and they all sold for 200 to 300 bucks apiece that's shameful and shabby not to mention disgraceful. That's a big part of the problem. Us guys here in ...........have even started to put minimums on certain hunts to make sure they go well its not full proof but it does work from time to time. This is the first year the Board wants to do on-line bidding here in ......... first thing we are doing is protecting our good donors and keeping certain hunts and fishing trips in HOUSE based on the fact we don't know who we are sending if it sells on-line. Some of these people have been faithful to this chapter for years and we don't want to lose them. Just my 2 cents Ernest . I am very fearful of where hunting is going not only in Africa but all over the world. I can't help think what my hunting Hero Elgin Gates would think today if he was still alive . You have his book , I think he would be very Disappointed . Thanks Ernest with best personal regards ...............

Folks,

Regarding the issuance of permits by the US Fish and Wildlife Service we believe that the Service intends to do the right thing and we applaud them for that. As several of you said, the proof will be in the issuance of some permits.

The meeting of the International Wildlife Conservation Council is public, which is why I can go. Paul Babaz is a member of the Council, I am not. The room for the meeting is limited, though, so advance registration is required. I am a good note-taker (lawyer by profession) so I will have some things to report after the meeting.

Rick Parsons, CEO
Safari Club International

Hello and thank you for being open to questions on this forum.
The question I have not seen answered yet about the captive bred lion hunting is : Why now?
We have seen reports of it NOT being to public pressure, etc but the timing certainly seems contrary to that. My own personal issue is that if it is unethical according to SCI standards, why was it OK ten or five years ago?
On another note, I believe that SCI has an image problem, obviously from the public but even among hunting circles and some members of this forum. I had an idea a while back that might help resolve some of that image issue. If you had outfitters instead of having to donate hunts to exhibit at the shows ship over the piles of snares, gin traps and assorted weapons confiscated from poachers to exhibit at the show, you would have a great PR opportunity to show the public what legal hunting does to support the animals, but also those items could be auctioned to members. I know I would love to have a pile of contraband in my trophy room to help explain what hunters dollars actually do for wildlife. That certainly means more to me and probably a large group of hunters than most of the awards for "attaining the slam" given out at the banquets. By the way, I have just joined SCI as a new member to hopefully be a part of the solution. Time will tell how that turns out. Thanks for listening and I appreciate your responses to the other questions.

As as new member of SCI (just got my membership card yesterday) I would like to see SCI fight to get an African to head CITES. I’d like to see a full court press, inc. lobbying and ad campaigns. Europeans telling African’s how they are allowed to manage and use their wildlife resources in the 21st. Century smacks of neocolonialism.

Someone like say, Ivan Carter, who was voted chair of the Interior Department's new Wildlife Conservation Council’s subcommittee on enforcement would be my first choice?

Fred Gunner said:

I would like to see SCI fight to get an African to head CITES.

Click to expand...

And I would like to see our government follow CITES export quotas.

Mike70560 said:

And I would like to see our government follow CITES export quotas.

Click to expand...

With one very short act of Congress that could happen. Please to all on AH, write your congressman and ask them to support this bill. If I've got this right this bill would limit the ESA to animals native to the U.S. and exclude non-native species.

Paul and Rick,

I just read a (more or less) scholarly review of the media coverage of the Cecil affair, posted on this site. A well done and balanced piece. It contains the following statement:

A lot of us on the forum were very unhappy when this announcement was made, the general view being, I think, that SCI was 'throwing Palmer under the bus.' Given that SCI took this action and made it public, can you now tell us if the investigation is complete and what the status of Dr. Palmer's membership is?

Normally, I'd say that was personal information and therefore private, but given that SCI chose to make it public in the first instance, I'd suggest that you have an obligation to close the matter out.

Apologies if this has been addressed elsewhere - I couldn't find it.

Thanks

PHOENIX PHIL said:

With one very short act of Congress that could happen. Please to all on AH, write your congressman and ask them to support this bill. If I've got this right this bill would limit the ESA to animals native to the U.S. and exclude non-native species.

Click to expand...

Agree completely! SCI is about to have its annual Lobby Day in Washington, DC and this is one of the pieces of legislation we are asking Members of Congress to support.

Mike70560 said:

And I would like to see our government follow CITES export quotas.

Click to expand...

SCI has argued for this as well. The issue is that there are so many antis out there that go off like rockets as soon as someone in the government considers anything like this that the government is reluctant to go that way. We are talking to other major hunting organizations about getting our ducks in a row (good phrase for a bunch of hunters, don't you think? ) to get more proactive to see if we can dull the edge of this political activism. The problem is that there are a lot of folks who don't know anything about hunting except that we shoot things. They are easily swayed by the antis. It is not an easy task to get to the majority of the US or world population and tell them how hunting does not harm populations and can be a tool for conservation. This is a major area of work for us and for several other big organizations.

Rick Parsons said:

It is not an easy task to get to the majority of the US or world population and tell them how hunting does not harm populations and can be a tool for conservation. This is a major area of work for us and for several other big organizations.

Click to expand...

Mr Parsons have you had a chance to read Diana Rupp's article entitled "Telling Our Story" posted here on AH?

Here: https://www.africahunting.com/threads/nimrod-society.43089/

If the numbers presented in the article in regard to turning the attitudes of the general public are correct I think SCI should take a very serious look into promoting these programs.

Again, thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely

So you move the CEO position to DC and then you retire!

Paul Babaz said:

@ThomasBeaham Thomas, thank you for this suggestion as this is something that was brought up before and record book department is looking into having anonymous entries, to provide the taxonomic information for those who don't want to be listed for whatever their reasons. Thanks!

Click to expand...

@Paul Babaz,

Hi Paul, I am hearing through the grapevine that this suggestion may come to fruition.
Specifically, allowing the listing in the record books with a membership number rather than the contributors name is what I read.
Are you at liberty to comment?

Thanks for your time and effort.

@ThomasBeaham
Yes sir, you heard correctly as this is another pet project I have been working on. Personally, I view the record book for what it is, a depository of taxonomic information that can be used for research, etc. for years to come. For me it’s a matter of personal opinion and I am making NO JUDGEMENT, but I am not concerned with having my name in the book, nor am I interested in the awards program, but I do see a great value in having the records of animals being harvested. It’s how the B&C record book came about..


Good hunting, Paul

@Mike70560 You know I agree with you and share your sentiments and have tried to do my part in helping affect change, but it takes more then one person which is why I encourage everyone to become a part of the change either via an SCI chapter or the International board.

Good hunting, Paul

Paul Babaz said:

@ThomasBeaham
Yes sir, you heard correctly as this is another pet project I have been working on. Personally, I view the record book for what it is, a depository of taxonomic information that can be used for research, etc. for years to come. For me it’s a matter of personal opinion and I am making NO JUDGEMENT, but I am not concerned with having my name in the book, nor am I interested in the awards program, but I do see a great value in having the records of animals being harvested. It’s how the B&C record book came about..


Good hunting, Paul

Click to expand...

Good morning Paul,

The record book is a problem with optics. As you, I could not care less about it, beyond the imaging issue. People on one hand will say "I don't care about the anti-hunters or even the fence sitters opinion." Then will agree that a messaging campaign, such as the one in Colorado, can be and are effective.

Face it fella's we cannot, any longer be in-your-face about our demographics image. There just aren't enough of us to garner any political or legislative support. Politicians are run by one thing and one thing only, their re-elections. The entire national demographic of international hunters numbers in the range of 15,000. That number, as a constituency is less that insignificant. We need to garner public support or at least limit the bad imagery. Awards and record books are counter to that end.

@IdaRam
I understand where you are coming from and agree with a lot of it, maybe all of it. I agree SCI has an image problem, and I still think a lot of this is coming from folks how became disenchanted with SCI a long time ago and have not given the leadership of the last several years a new look. SCI still has a long way to go to do better, but I think it has come a long ways. Still room for a lot of improvement but it’s hard to change 50 years of perception in a few years.


. I personally don't participate in the awards program but there are a lot of hunters who do, and I am not going to judge another hunter as it causes divisiveness and we all need to work together to save the freedom to hunt! There are many organizations that have awards programs, but for some reason SCI is the favorite whipping post, and I will say that much of the reputation was well deserved, but a lot of the positive change has been ignored.


As an example I have not been on here much due to a really busy schedule as I have been on here almost 2 hours today and I haven't even answered everyone yet. BUT I have noticed there a lot of postings here on successes SCI has had in the legislative realm, and yet hardly a comment from anyone on these threads, but I did one comment praising on individual who had absolutely nothing to do with the issue at all but got credit for it. This being said, as soon as there is anything remotely controversial, the thread is overwhelmed with folks piling on. Maybe its human behavior, but it’s unfortunate as there are a lot of dedicated folks, many of whom are volunteers working hard on these issues within SCI and the other organizations we work together with… NRA, DSC, HSC, WSF, CSF, etc. I’m not doing this to get a pat on the back, but it’s just interesting that more folks comment to beat up on group, but ignore anything positive coming out of the same group.


These comments are not aimed at you (pardon the pun) as your comments are always fair and balanced, but there are members here and on another forum who love to beat on SCI despite the fact that we are fighting the fight for ALL hunters here and abroad along with NRA, DSC, HSC, etc. SCI isn’t perfect and I am certainly not even close to being good, but yet I choose to continue to work for the cause regardless and I wish the detractors would choose to join the fight rather than sit back and criticize as change happens from within.


Good hunting, Paul

@Mike70560 I should have waited to reply to your other post.. yep, membership is the key and we need to recruit more young hunters which is the future to save hunting. Not just recruit for SCI but recruit for hunting, We are indeed re introducing a youth membership again, and although it's not exactly what I would like to see it is a start, and I will be working to make tweaks and adjustments. It's great to have youth join the organizations, but more important to instill the passion of hunting. We all need to do a better job of taking kids hunting!

Good hunting, Paul

I will give SCI credit where credit is due, and that's your legal office in DC and the lawsuits they file and defend.

I don't have a problem with the Record Book, but do have one with the awards. Slam for this slam for that. I get that it's revenue for SCI, but is that the best way to earn revenue, by having a lighting rod. Yes, its short term revenue, but long term death.

And looking at those 990's it looks like it's past time to trim overhead.

@PHOENIX PHIL
Thank you for your comment and I must be brief as I really need to log off here as I have a meeting to get to soon, but I have addressed some of which you have mentioned in other posts. Some of you may or may not know but there are two organizations, SCI and SCIF. SCI is a 501c4 that carries out the advocacy mission of SCI, and SCIF (SCI Foundation) which is a 501c3 organizations who’s tag line is “First For Wildlife” and has been for better than 10 years. SCIF’s mission is Conservation, Education, and Humanitarian services which includes our Veteran activities, and Sportsmen against hunger, etc. The $ raised from convention, and the contribution from chapters supports these missions as well as the advocacy mission. Although individuals can contribute to SCIF and many do at substantial levels, the largest benefactor of SCIF is SCI. I will say that SCIF spends millions each year for on the ground conservation around the world although the majority is here in North America. We publish a lot on this, but I guess it isn’t a real sexy topic and does get a lot of attention. The chapters do a lot of great work as @IdaRam pointed out and SCIF supports the chapter’s efforts with matching grants. I am a Veteran and have participated in a lot of Wounded Veteran hunts which is one of my favorite things to do. Lastly SCI spends a great deal of on the legislative side outright and via SCI PAC, and via out Super Pac HAF (Hunter Action Fund) we play a role in elections across the country, and I am proud to say that we have had huge success in the races we have played a role, but even though SCI PAC is the largest sportsmen’s PAC on the Hill, it’s not nearly enough to play a role in every election. Saturday night at convention I spoke to the attendees and made an appeal and I was very excited to see the contributions raised for HAF and the $ is still coming in from Chapters, individuals, and corporations. SCI doesn’t send out as much direct mail as NRA but we do so quarterly, but unfortunately not everyone answers the call for SCIF, SCI PAC, or HAF.


I have to take this opportunity to remind everyone that we have a tough election in 2020 and Michael Bloomberg is one of the most anti-gun, anti-hunting, anti-everything on the planet. His net worth is estimated between $52-$54 Billion, and he has said he will spend it all before he dies, and he’s played a big part in elections around the country especially here in Georgia. I said all of this during a speech at convention, but you all may not have been there. IF Bloomberg was willing to spend over $100 Million to become Mayor of New York City, how much do you think he is willing to pay to become President of the Untitled States??? The time is now folks, the enemy is not at the gate, the enemy is walking through the gate… Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Bloomberg, and many more. It doesn’t matter if you give $1, or $100… everything helps… Obama raised his $ with small donations of $20 and less!!! You may not want to give to SCI PAC or HAF, but I implore you to give to a candidate or party who is going to fight for us!!!! NRA played a big part and we work extremely close to NRA on these issues. PLEASE don’t stand by and watch!


Sorry for the advertisement…


Good hunting, Paul

@wesheltonj

Thank you saying this as I will share it with the DC office!

I have said it before, I agree with a lot of what you say, as I am not a participant in the record book but a lot of folks are and I don't want to cause any more divides among hunters then we already have so I have been speaking on this topic to try to inform and educate folks of the reality of being a lightning rod. Anna Seidman is head of SCI's litigation and she does an incredible job and I will again give credit to NRA as we work in tandem with NRA and when it comes to hunting issues, SCI typically takes the lead and on gun issues, we assist and NRA takes the lead as it just makes sense that way. Yes SCI does play a role in 2nd amendment as it was another pet project of mine and I believe it is absolutely necessary to fight for our 2nd amendment as most hunters do use a firearm!